The Lure of Fantasy

Why does fantasy and magic facinate us?  Why are so many people drawn with extreem fantaticism to series like Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings and other Fantasy works?

I have a theory.

In our contemporary world, globalism and relativism and secularism are the rule of the day.  God is not popular.  Faith is not popular.  Miracles don’t exist.  This is what many proclaim.  All the spiritual bases of life are being attacked on all sides.  The faithful, as in their beginnings, often fear to profess their beliefs; for when they do, they are cruely attacked.  It is a sad and dark time we live in. 

And yet, their is a small ray of hope.

That hope is fantasy, which is both a blessing and danger.  In fantasy, in magic, in wonder we find the last vestiges of the spiritual, if hidden or in mutilated form.  Through fantasy, the yearning in our hearts for miracle is revealed.  Our yearning for God, for something greater and outside our possible experience is fullfilled.  I believe, in the end, none of us want to believe in a Godless, scientific world.  Therefore, secretly, hidden in some deep well of our heart, there lies a yearning for the miraculous. 

As has been stated by many Christian authors, including Tolkien, fantasy offers the ideal conduit for spiritual Truth.  In fantasy, the miracles of our world are allowed to live on, uncontested.  As their wonders are revealed to us on the page, we readers begin to become more aware of the miracles all around us.  Miracles do exist.  They are everywhere, we just refuse to look and recognize.  The great triumph of fantasy is its ability to reinvigorate our own world, to raise it from the dissillusionment of this age and show it for the shinging jewel of endless wonders it is.

Evil…or Not? (cont.)

The best example of Tolkien’s views on ‘evil’ in Middle Earth is found in the fourth book, being the second part of The Two Towers.  Here, Sam and Frodo meet up with Gollum.  This is the true heart of the story; its emotional and moral center.  From the Taming of Smeagol onward, the reader follows Gollum’s internal struggle: between the good Smeagol and bad Gollum. 

Gollum is a justifiably detestable character, fearsome, disgusting at times and conniving.  Yet miraculously, he is changed.  In some manner, he is redeemed, if only temporarily.  Nothing is evil from the beginning.  Nothing is ever wholly evil either.  Gollum gives us this knowledge.  We find hope for the futures of Frodo and Sam; the Ring is not as indomitable to the spirit as it seems.  Somewhere deep in Gollum, Smeagol reawakens in response to the kindness and friendship of Frodo.  He is shown to be a weak, wretched and ancient creature.  He is a creature worthy of great pity. 

Tortured spirit that he is, who can blame him for falling back into the Ring’s power?  He is afraid, greatly afraid.  The Ring seems to be going closer and closer to Sauron.  As well, Gollum is approaching Mordor once more, the sight of his captivity and great torture.  His own self-interest battles with his affection for Frodo.  In the end he looks out for his own skin and betrays the hobbits to Shelob.  And yet, even then, some part of Smeagol remains in his refusal to harm Frodo himself. 

The Ring can be thought of the one thing that gave some modicum of happiness, satisfaction or pleasure to Gollum.  He yearns for it and hates it.  It is comparable to an addiction or a bad habit.  After so long a life that his own existence seems meaningless, the Ring gives Gollum meaning.  In some ways it has become who he is, which would explain his own moniker: ‘My Precious.’  He is an empty shell.  That void is filled through the mercy and care of Frodo.  This is the heroism of Frodo, no more, no less.  It may be this alone which ensures the destruction of the Ring.

Orcs: Evil…or Not?

One thing I’ve often noticed in Tolkien’s work is that evil is never one sided.  This stems from Tolkien’s Catholic/Christian views on evil.  Nothing, in the beginning, was evil.  Morgoth is a fallen Valar.  Sauron a fallen Maiar.  The orcs, mutilated elves.  The trolls, mutilated ents.  About the only being(s) for whom this doesn’t seem to fit is Ungoliant and the Spiders. 

The orcs of Middle Earth are intelligent.  They seem to have a primitive culture and society.  When Shagrat and Gorbag talk together, after finding Frodo’s body, they seem almost like friends.  Granted they are quite rough around the edges, but they don’t sound that different from any of the other characters or even you and me. 

So.  Are the orcs really evil?

No, not really.  They may do evil, but they do not embody it.  Part of the problem is they need leadership, and they seem easily cowed.  If you think about the original elves made orcs for Morgoth…they were so tortured and mutilated, who’s to say what they’d do to avoid more pain?  Such torture and suffering as would be necessary to tear the elves away from their being or their physiological form must be great.  Most likely they were mad and blind in their sufferings. 

Let’s return to Shagrat and Gorbag for a bit.  The two of them don’t want to fight.  They resent being ordered around by Sauron and the Ring-wraiths.  They wish to leave; to make their way on their own. 

Are they evil?

The Strength of Faramir

As most people will and have said, the worst sin of The Lord of the Rings films is Faramir, aka Boromir’s clone.  In The Two Towers film, Faramir is essentially a clone of Borromir.  In the Ring, all he sees is the power to protect his people; a weapon with which to fight Sauron.  He is harsh, almost bordering on cruel.  He is also quite hasty and unwise.  The majesty and honor his of Numenorian blood is lost.  Like Borromir, he is drawn to the Ring, wishing to take it for his own.  He shows no wisdom, no understanding of its evil, no understanding of tact or care.  He is utterly callous.

This “Faramir” is unrecognizable. 

The true Faramir is honorable, and just.  He is wise.  He understands the need for caution.  He has some knowledge of “Isildur’s Bane” and its dangers.  He tells Frodo, before even knowing what he has, that he would never take the Ring from him.  And when he finds out what great power, and corruption, is within his grasp he keeps his word.  He helps Frodo.  He lets him go.  He shows mercy.  None of these qualities is shown in the film’s pseudo-Faramir.  That Faramir is a travesty to behold.

The meaning of suffering

When you hear the word “suffer” or “suffering,” most people would cringe at the thought.  Today it means pain, agony, torture.  But that does not reveal the true beauty of the word.  Look in Scripture or even Shakespeare.  Suffering may mean pain, but it also means to allow.  It is one of the most beautiful word choices you can find in the Bible.  Christ suffered himself to die for us.  He not only endured great agony, He allowed and accepted the burden for His love of us. 

This is why I love language and words.  There is so much power and meaning in them.

Harry Potter, Literary Hog

Something has been bothering me the last couple months.  Read your paper.  Does it seem to have many articles about a certain wizard?  Every year, at about this time, the papers are innundated by articles about the Harry Potter films and books.  I have two problems with this. 

All this attention is given to Harry Potter.  The books are popular, but there are many many more books out there.  Harry Potter is often portrayed as the “be all end all” of contemporary lit.  I see Harry Potter as the road block to other great works.  I agree that HP has reinvigorated reading in our society.  I just don’t see any effort being made to encourage reading beyond HP. 

When the LotR films came out, how much focus was given to Tolkien and his works?  From what I recall, next to none.  Sure, there were a couple more shelves in the bookstore, but that was it.  There was no real credit given in the mass media.  It was all about Jackson.  Seeing all the “hoopla” over HP helped me realize this.  There was almost no effort to get the word out.  In some ways, it was made out to be Jackson & co.’s creation alone.  I’ll admit, there were blurbs here or there saying “JRR Tolkien’s epic…blah blah blah” etc.  But really, except for saying he wrote a book, nothing more was done. 

Thus we get Harry Potter, the Literary Hog.  Taking the spotlight, and obscuring other great works in darkness.

The Problem with Fantasy

Fantasy literature holds a challenge for any reader.  Some people are able to cope and some are not.  From the start, fantasy builds hurdles the reader has to deal with for them to be able to immerse themselves in the story.  This makes fantasy unique within the realm of literary genres.  It is not beholden to any rules of this world. 

A fantasy world can be tantalizingly similar to our own, and yet hold wonders that confound the imagination.  How is the reader to accept this?  It requires a willingness on the reader’s part to loosen their grip on what is possible.  And yet at the same time, no such thing is necessary.  Fantasy offers something completely new to the reader.  It holds the great power of metaphor.  This becomes a conduit through which Truths of this world can be protrayed and explained.  Often the mysteries of our world cannot be put into focus easily…they’re hard to grasp and understand the depth of their importance.  With fantasy, the bounds of our perception are unlimited.  There, we can finally see. 

Few authors fully utilize this potential.  They do not realize the power that fantasy holds.  Here, the power of words is paramount.  Preconceptions, biases, and physical limitations are left behind. 

The problem with fantasy is that many people find it hard to make this adjustment.  In a sense it is comparable to being dropped in a foreign country.  It causes insecurity and doubt.  The fantasy novel requires the reader to be able to adapt, to leave the questions for a moment, to let the world and the story sweep you up. 

A quick word about LotR films and me

Now from that title, you’re probably thinking that’s impossible…but I’ll give it a try.

I have a confession to make.  *whispers* No matter what I may say here, I actually do enjoy the films.  Sure it’s a more superficial, light entertainment.  So…watching the films is both a joy and pain for me.  On one hand they are beautifully filmed, with wonderous soundtracks and typical “rip-roaring” Hollywood fun.  On the other it is horrifyingly one dimensional, simplistic and contrived.  There are parts of the movies I absolutely love for their interpretation of the book…and yet others I love just for their cinematic beauty.  And then there are other parts…mind you large ones!…that cause me to cringe and shout angrilly at my TV.  Obviously, as a direct outcome, no-one will watch the movies with me…lol. 

I have finished my reread of the book.  Now I’m just trying to work up the courage to watch the films again so I can see just how far they diverge. 

The value of misinformation

That sounds like a paradox doesn’t it?  How can misinformation be valuable?  Well…in literature it can be a great thing.  I think many people, including myself at one point, don’t realize how masterful Tolkien’s use of misinformation is in LotR.  This is a factor that is even further blurred due to the meshing of storylines, found in the films. 

When you read the book, I’d like you to pay attention to where and when Tolkien ends and begins books 3, 4, and 5.  These factors are very important. 

Fourth book: Frodo, Sam and Gollum.  During the entirety of book three we readers are left to wonder what their fate is.  Do they live?  Are they captured?  And as we move through Frodo, Sam and Gollum’s journey to Mordor, we find the same questions being raised about the rest of the Nine Walkers.  Whether we follow Frodo and Sam or the other of the nine, each story is mutually exclusive.  You’re left to wonder, like the characters themselves.  You feel the same doubt.  At the close of book four and The Two Tower, we are left in a state of shock.  There is confusion about the fate of Frodo…is he dead or alive?  Will the orcs kill him?  Torture him?  Will he reveil the Quest?  And Sam too.  Can he save Frodo?  Will he also be captured?  Or failing, will he go on alone. 

In book five, we are transplanted back to the world of Gondor and the main focus of the war.  We are still left to wonder, however, and often the fear is great that the Ring has indeed been recovered by the Enemy.  The tension builds and boils when the Mouth of Sauron produces Frodo’s mail coat and cloak and Sam’s knife.  All of the sudden all hopes seem dashed.  We are brought to the brink of despair and then dropped back into Frodo and Sam’s story.

We rejoice to find Frodo is saved…though already frightful signs of the Ring’s hold are appearing.  The reader now thinks of Aragorn and his army.  Can Frodo and Sam fullfill their quest in time?  Will they be caught and cause a second darkness?  When they reach Mount Doom, Frodo seems half dead and Gollum has reappeared…the outlook does not look good.  Yet by some twist of fate the Ring is destroyed.  We have a moment of eucatastrophe. 

The separation of the plot based upon the separation of the companions is masterful.  It can also be seen in 1. Pippin and Gandalf 2. Merry and 3. Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli.  In every case, the separation causes great tension and suspense.  At all times the outcome seems to waver on a knife’s edge.  It is because of this literary devise. 

I understand why it was not used for the films…yet at the same time I can envision how powerful the films could have been using the book’s structure as a guide.

The nature of evil

Recently, I read CS Lewis’s space trilogy.  These three books contain some of the most chilling depictions of evil I have come across in literature.  In Perelandra, Weston is essentially the Devil.  The heart of the story is a retelling of the Temptation of Eve.  Lewis’s “devil” is horrifying in appearance and action.  Yet what I find most disturbing is the actual temptation.  Everything he says is true.  Everything he does to tempt “Eve,” on the surface at least, is innocent.  There seems no way to stop him or undo his work.  The entire scenario is truly disturbing.

Let’s change tack a bit. 

Saruman.  Why did he fall?  Because he studied the works of Sauron too closely, too deeply. 

If you’ve read any biographies or analytical works about Tolkien and his life, you will find this danger in the study of evil also in his life.  It is the reason in part for tensions between Tolkien and Lewis.  In Screwtape Letters as well as his Space Trilogy, Lewis delves deeply into the mechinations of the devil.  …Just some food for thought.

 Back to Lewis’s Weston/devil.  He sounds a lot like another character, doesn’t he?  It hit me recently while contemplating Tolkien’s views on evil.  Weston :: Wormtongue.  They are tantilizingly similar.  Both use a twisted partial truth to corrupt and attack.  This also extends to the Ring, of which I will go into more detail later.